Viewing TRUST when not logged in

[malevolent]

I'm positive this new measure will finally prevent many newbies from getting scammed. I'll know for sure if I'll start getting less PMs from Newbies who got conned before registering here, but it's a warning which is hard to miss so should be enough.

[1714775186]

1714775186

[1714775186]

1714775186

[1714775186]

1714775186

[mikeywith]

if more DT members neg-trust the topic starter than positive-trust him.

FINALLY ! although i was "hoping" to see something similar to what a logged in user would see, simply because scammers can still advertise their scam b.s in other people's topics, in fact if such behavior is increased - then it will be harder to spot them now than before.

but i can't complain much, that is a good start.



 

[Quickseller]

Here's what it looks like:

It might be a good idea to translate this to the local language when this is displayed in one of the local subs.

edit: it appears there are many marketplace subs in the local sections that do not have trust displayed.

[EcuaMobi]

if more DT members neg-trust the topic starter than positive-trust him.

FINALLY ! although i was "hoping" to see something similar to what a logged in user would see, simply because scammers can still advertise their scam b.s in other people's topic, in fact if such behaviour is increased then it will be harder to spot them now than before.

but i can't complain much, that is a good start.

That could happen but it's a much less serious problem. The main problem is when the scammers themselves create self-moderated and/or locked threads so nobody can post any warnings. This is practically solved with the announced change.
If a scammer posts on someone else's thread then the creator of that thread or anybody else can post a warning.

I too would prefer to see a warning next to every post made by a known scammer but I don't think it's a considerable issue.

[mikeywith]

If a scammer posts on someone else's thread then the creator of that thread or anybody else can post a warning.

ok maybe i should have explained my concern a bit more.


1- a scammer starts a locked thread selling gift cards.
2- uses a sockpuppet to comment saying he sells the same gift cards maybe at cheaper rate and posts his email/telegram contact.
3- another sockpuppet to vouch for the previous sockpuppet.
4- another sockpuppet to confirm the scam warning about OP and vouch for the first sockpuppet.

This is just one of many other scenarios, i am all about optimism but i can't ignore the fact this move alone won't help newbie visitors the way we expect.


you know scammers don't rest, it's pretty obvious that this will be their next strategy, so in order for us to keep fighting them, surfing topics alone will not be enough, we now have to dig into every reply.

@sandy has got a lot of work to do now since this was her idea  

[EcuaMobi]

1- a scammer starts a locked thread selling gift cards.
2- uses a sockpuppet to comment saying he sells the same gift cards maybe at cheaper rate and posts his email/telegram contact.
3- another sockpuppet to vouch for the previous sockpuppet.
4- another sockpuppet to confirm the scam warning about OP and vouch for the first sockpuppet.

I see. I hadn't thought of that.

The warning would help a little because newbies would at least know scammers are not banned (unlike most other forums) but a warning next to every post made by a scammer would be much better.
theymos, any chance you make this change?

[Quickseller]

If a scammer posts on someone else's thread then the creator of that thread or anybody else can post a warning.

ok maybe i should have explained my concern a bit more.


1- a scammer starts a locked thread selling gift cards.
2- uses a sockpuppet to comment saying he sells the same gift cards maybe at cheaper rate and posts his email/telegram contact.
3- another sockpuppet to vouch for the previous sockpuppet.
4- another sockpuppet to confirm the scam warning about OP and vouch for the first sockpuppet.

This is just one of many other scenarios, i am all about optimism but i can't ignore the fact this move alone won't help newbie visitors the way we expect.


you know scammers don't rest, it's pretty obvious that this will be their next strategy, so in order for us to keep fighting them, surfing topics alone will not be enough, we now have to dig into every reply.

@sandy has got a lot of work to do now since this was her idea 

What you describe would be off topic. You should report those posts and they should be deleted.

[EcuaMobi]

What you describe would be off topic. You should report those posts and they should be deleted.

Yes, but that only applies for that specific scenario. A small change could avoid that:

The scammer could ask who can sell gift cards, and then his alt could offer their services, posting an auto-buy link.
Other alts could accuse the OP of trying to scam (to justify the warning at the top of the thread) and vouch for the first alt.

All of this while the thread is locked and nobody else can intervene.

[sandy-is-fine]

Logged-out users will now see a warning in trust-enabled sections if more DT members neg-trust the topic starter than positive-trust him.

This increases the responsibility of DT members not to give negative trust for stupid reasons, but only for things that cause you to believe that the person is a scammer.

<DOING THE HAPPY DANCE!>

Good beginning, thank you.

<DUCKING>  Next step is to post that same warning on the same users even when the user is logged in! 

[ranman09]

If a scammer posts on someone else's thread then the creator of that thread or anybody else can post a warning.

ok maybe i should have explained my concern a bit more.


1- a scammer starts a locked thread selling gift cards.
2- uses a sockpuppet to comment saying he sells the same gift cards maybe at cheaper rate and posts his email/telegram contact.
3- another sockpuppet to vouch for the previous sockpuppet.
4- another sockpuppet to confirm the scam warning about OP and vouch for the first sockpuppet.

This is just one of many other scenarios, i am all about optimism but i can't ignore the fact this move alone won't help newbie visitors the way we expect.


you know scammers don't rest, it's pretty obvious that this will be their next strategy, so in order for us to keep fighting them, surfing topics alone will not be enough, we now have to dig into every reply.

@sandy has got a lot of work to do now since this was her idea  

I agree, some of the most valuable information and facts are in the comments. Sometimes the OP can't or simply forget to cover it. But, how a DT can track of these problems if there are lots of posts in a thread? Using a dislike like button on a post so other users can participate and help DTs? Oh or the existing report button.

Logged-out users will now see a warning in trust-enabled sections if more DT members neg-trust the topic starter than positive-trust him.

This increases the responsibility of DT members not to give negative trust for stupid reasons, but only for things that cause you to believe that the person is a scammer.

<DOING THE HAPPY DANCE!>

Good beginning, thank you.

<DUCKING>  Next step is to post that same warning on the same users even when the user is logged in! 

Yeah, I think this will be great also. But I think for now the negative user counter below the author's name is enough. Let's save that space for important announcements and for April 1.

[hugeblack]

Logged-out users will now see a warning in trust-enabled sections if more DT members neg-trust the topic starter than positive-trust him.

Will you add the warning about dealing with a newbie account, in case of circumventing by creating more accounts?
Will Trust rate be affected "somthnig like Trust: -35: -6 / +29"?

edit: it appears there are many marketplace subs in the local sections that do not have trust displayed.

Not only marketplace but all Altcoin sections "ANN, bounty & Airdrop"

[Steamtyme]

1- a scammer starts a locked thread selling gift cards.
2- uses a sockpuppet to comment saying he sells the same gift cards maybe at cheaper rate and posts his email/telegram contact.
3- another sockpuppet to vouch for the previous sockpuppet.
4- another sockpuppet to confirm the scam warning about OP and vouch for the first sockpuppet.

I see. I hadn't thought of that.

The warning would help a little because newbies would at least know scammers are not banned (unlike most other forums) but a warning next to every post made by a scammer would be much better.
theymos, any chance you make this change?

I could see that being to broad a stroke. I'm playing catch up here but the way it reads to me this takes in account all DT members. So until we see the changes that theymos might be expecting in the way feedback is being left I'm happy with topics being flagged for now. Ideally this should be enough for these guests to consider logging in as suggested or question everyone in the thread.

The bonus being they maybe become active in the community and login/register, this leads them to see feedback the same as everyone else, or they are reminded the be cautious on the internet.

Overall it is a good step that shouldn't have to much collateral damage; with the added benefit of hopefully curbing some of the failings people have in the way they leave feedback.

Good job sticking with your suggestion sandy-is-fine

[marlboroza]

Logged-out users will now see a warning in trust-enabled sections if more DT members neg-trust the topic starter than positive-trust him.

This increases the responsibility of DT members not to give negative trust for stupid reasons, but only for things that cause you to believe that the person is a scammer.

This is great addition to forum, it reminds me of big yellow warning sing at askgamblers  but to be honest you should change something. Just one example of user with -11 negative ratings and +11 positive (last positive feedback is from 2015):





There is no warning, perhaps not to count very old positive feedbacks, or to count only last few feedbacks?

[LoyceMobile]

The last example asks for a PM, so anyone interested would see his trust first.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I think this is a great start to protecting guests from being scammed.

In relation to the already mentioned comments about these untrustworthy users posting in other users' threads or starting threads with sockpuppets who are not red trusted, I would agree that there should be a warning under individual accounts. I also think there should be a warning on individual users' profile pages, since any text or links they place in their signature/personal text/website are also viewable to guests.

[marlboroza]

The last example asks for a PM, so anyone interested would see his trust first.

That is why it is example, what if there was "contact me via telegram/email/other ways"? Never mind, it was just a thought, probably there are not many accounts who are tagged and warning won't show up.

[btcsmlcmnr]

The Warning is clear for Guest. However, I have a thought that maybe the forum should have more detailed guide on this issue, and the topic (if actually written by admin or some of staffs) should be pinned in the top of Beginners & Help. Maybe I am wrong at this point, and maybe that sort of guide topic is abundant.
I actually made my topic on this issue, what do you think about it?
Guests - Read Warnings on potential scam projects started by Neg Trust Users

[Quickseller]

What you describe would be off topic. You should report those posts and they should be deleted.

Yes, but that only applies for that specific scenario. A small change could avoid that:

The scammer could ask who can sell gift cards, and then his alt could offer their services, posting an auto-buy link.
Other alts could accuse the OP of trying to scam (to justify the warning at the top of the thread) and vouch for the first alt.

All of this while the thread is locked and nobody else can intervene.

The posts advertising, and vouching for the competitor (or "competitor" if they are alts) would be off topic, and should be deleted if reported.

I do agree there should be limits as to how frequently a thread can be unlocked. Perhaps one solution would be that once a thread has been locked twice in one month that if someone other than the OP makes a post in the thread, it can only be locked 4 hours after it was last unlocked.

There is no warning, perhaps not to count very old positive feedbacks, or to count only last few feedbacks?

I think the current algorithm is to prevent people like you from causing this warning being displayed for non-scammer reasons. 

[EcuaMobi]

What you describe would be off topic. You should report those posts and they should be deleted.

Yes, but that only applies for that specific scenario. A small change could avoid that:

The scammer could ask who can sell gift cards, and then his alt could offer their services, posting an auto-buy link.
Other alts could accuse the OP of trying to scam (to justify the warning at the top of the thread) and vouch for the first alt.

All of this while the thread is locked and nobody else can intervene.

The posts advertising, and vouching for the competitor (or "competitor" if they are alts) would be off topic, and should be deleted if reported.

That would be arguable at best, up to the moderator.
But it's not even too important as the OP could explicitly bump the thread as if he were asking for more providers.

[Quickseller]

What you describe would be off topic. You should report those posts and they should be deleted.

Yes, but that only applies for that specific scenario. A small change could avoid that:

The scammer could ask who can sell gift cards, and then his alt could offer their services, posting an auto-buy link.
Other alts could accuse the OP of trying to scam (to justify the warning at the top of the thread) and vouch for the first alt.

All of this while the thread is locked and nobody else can intervene.

The posts advertising, and vouching for the competitor (or "competitor" if they are alts) would be off topic, and should be deleted if reported.

That would be arguable at best, up to the moderator.
But it's not even too important as the OP could explicitly bump the thread as if he were asking for more providers.

Yes, someone creating a thread soliciting suggestions for services would get around the "off topic" problem.

My solution above regarding forcing threads to remain unlocked for a period of time would solve most of the problems regarding fake vouches.

You can also open a scam accusation, naming the forum handle, the URL of the service and/or contact information (eg telegram handle), so they will show up on google search results.